SJC vacates kidnap attempt conviction

A defendant’s conviction for the attempted kidnapping of an 11-year-old boy must be reversed because the commonwealth’s evidence was insufficient to prove that he had the intent forcibly or secretly to confine the boy, the Supreme Judicial Court has ruled.
The commonwealth relied on evidence that the defendant followed the boy after the boy refused to get into the defendant’s vehicle and later admitted that he wanted the boy to come home with him to listen to music.

But a majority of the SJC disagreed.

“Assuming, without deciding, that following a child in these circumstances would be sufficient evidence of an intent forcibly or secretly to confine a child, the testimony that the defendant ‘[k]ind of, yeah’ followed the boy is equivocal as to whether the defendant actually followed him after their interaction,” Chief Justice Roderick L. Ireland wrote for the majority. “[T]here is no evidence that the defendant did anything but drive away after the boy refused to get into the vehicle.”

In dissent, Justice Robert J. Cordy maintained that the evidence was sufficient for a rational juror to conclude that the defendant attempted secretly to confine the boy.

“The evidence was sufficient to establish that the defendant planned to take the boy inside a car, drive him to an unknown residence, and, at the very least, hold him for an indefinite amount of time, all without informing anyone who could assiduously assure that the boy was safe,” Cordy wrote.